Decision

Advance Housing and Support Limited (LH0280) - Regulatory Judgement: 24 June 2026

Updated 24 June 2026

Applies to England

Our Judgement

	Grade/Judgement	Change	Date of assessment
Consumer	C2 Our judgement is that there are some weaknesses in the landlord delivering the outcomes of the consumer standards and improvement is needed.	First grading	June 2026
Governance	G1 Our judgement is that the landlord meets our governance requirements.	Assessed and unchanged	June 2026
Viability	V2 Our judgement is that the landlord meets our viability requirements. It has the financial capacity to deal with a reasonable range of adverse scenarios but needs to manage material risks to ensure continued compliance.	Regrade	June 2026

Reason for publication

We are publishing a regulatory judgement for Advance Housing and Support Limited (Advance) following an inspection completed in June 2026.

This regulatory judgement confirms a consumer grade of C2, a governance grade of G1 and a financial viability regrade to V2.

Prior to this regulatory judgement, the governance and financial viability grades for Advance were last updated in October 2025 following a stability check to confirm a G1 grade for governance and a V1 grade for financial viability. This is the first time we have issued a consumer grade in relation to this landlord.

Summary of the decision

From the assurance gained during the inspection, based on the evidence provided by Advance, we have concluded that there are some weaknesses in Advance delivering the outcomes of the consumer standards and improvement is needed, specifically in relation to outcomes in our Safety and Quality Standard, Neighbourhood and Community Standard, and Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard. Based on this assessment, we have concluded a C2 grade for Advance.

Our judgement is that Advance meets our governance requirements. Advance has provided evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of its governance arrangements and that it continues to effectively manage the risks of its activities, allowing it to deliver its strategic and charitable objectives. Based on this assessment, we have concluded a G1 grade for Advance.

Our judgement is that Advance meets our financial viability requirements and is meeting covenant requirements, has strong liquidity, and has capacity to manage a reasonable range of adverse scenarios. However, Advance has the ongoing challenge of delivering its relatively low margin support services and housing activities in an uncertain economic environment. Advance needs to manage the risks associated with the delivery of its significant ongoing investment in existing homes to improve quality and energy efficiency. Based on this assessment, we have concluded a V2 regrade for Advance.

How we reached our judgement

We carried out an inspection of Advance to assess how well it is delivering the outcomes of the consumer standards and meeting our governance and financial viability requirements, as part of our planned regulatory inspection programme. During the inspection, we considered all four of the consumer standards: Neighbourhood and Community Standard, Safety and Quality Standard, Tenancy Standard, and the Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard.

During the inspection we observed a board meeting and Advance’s Housing Customer Partnership, spoke with tenants, held meetings with Advance including its non-executive directors, interviewed staff, and reviewed a wide range of documents provided by Advance.

Our regulatory judgement is based on all the relevant information we obtained during the inspection as well as analysis of information supplied by Advance in its regulatory returns and other regulatory engagement activity.

Summary of findings  

Consumer – C2 – June 2026

During the inspection, Advance provided evidence-based assurance that it understands its responsibilities and has effective arrangements in place to ensure the health and safety of tenants in their homes and associated communal areas. Advance demonstrated that it meets landlord health and safety requirements, supported by internal monitoring and external specialist assurance.

We found evidence of weaknesses in the provision of an effective, efficient and timely repairs service. Through the inspection, we identified weaknesses in systems for managing, evidencing and reporting information on repairs. Issues with oversight of contractor performance management and the quality of information held mean Advance cannot consistently evidence that emergency works, hazard remediation and requirements to investigate, identify and repair hazards such as damp and mould, are completed within required timescales.

Advance has a programme in place to obtain an accurate and up‑to‑date record of the condition of its homes, with a high proportion physically inspected. However, there is a gap in the assurance that the board relies on, with limited recent independent validation of the quality of its homes. Advance identified the need for improvement and has plans in place to strengthen assurance, which we will continue to monitor through ongoing engagement.

In relation to the Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard, we saw evidence that Advance has developed meaningful and proportionate tenant engagement arrangements. We gained assurance that tenants are given opportunities to influence service delivery and organisational decision making, including through involvement in scrutiny activity, recruitment, complaints learning and strategy development.

We observed a culture of engagement and respect, and tenant satisfaction outcomes are positive, with performance at or above sector medians in several areas. However, Advance has identified areas for improvement including complaints performance, and themes around communication and repairs contractor behaviour. Advance has insight into these issues and plans in place developed with tenant involvement, although this work remains at an early stage and will require continued oversight through ongoing engagement.

We saw evidence that Advance considers the diverse needs of tenants in the design and delivery of services but that this is limited by Advance’s systems. Advance recognises that it has weaknesses in how it is able to use the information it holds about its tenants to inform, design and deliver services for tenants, and is developing plans to address this. Further work is needed to ensure the information is used to inform landlord services and to deliver fair and equitable outcomes for tenants.

In relation to the Neighbourhood and Community Standard, Advance provided evidence that it works with relevant organisations to deter and tackle anti-social behaviour and hate crime. However, we identified weaknesses in how anti-social behaviour is reported and monitored. Information available to tenants on how to report anti-social behaviour and what they can expect is limited and board level oversight was also limited due to gaps in reporting.

In relation to the Tenancy Standard, Advance has shown it has a fair and transparent approach to allocating and letting homes, including how it takes the needs of tenants and prospective tenants into account. Advance demonstrated that it ensures that tenancies and terms granted are appropriate and meet all relevant requirements of the Tenancy Standard.  

Governance – G1 – June 2026

Based on evidence gained through the inspection, we have assurance that Advance’s governance arrangements enable it to set and deliver its strategy, manage risk and adequately control the organisation enabling it to deliver its objectives.

We found evidence that the board is appropriately skilled and experienced to deliver its corporate plan. Advance’s board demonstrated that it provides challenge on performance against its targets and considers risk appetite in strategic decision making. Performance is managed through a suite of performance indicators with regular reporting in place, and we saw evidence that certain strategic objectives are on track. Where performance is below target, Advance has plans in place to address this.

Advance regularly reviews its governance arrangements, with the most recent external governance review carried out in 2025, which concluded that governance is effective overall. Advance has a governance effectiveness plan to monitor progress against the review’s recommendations. This is overseen by the board, and there is evidence that this activity is used to improve services to its residents.

Advance has a defined risk management framework and is aware of its principal risks. Through the inspection we identified that enhancements are needed in Advance’s application of its risk management framework. Advance has acknowledged these issues and was able to evidence how it is seeking to adapt and strengthen how it manages and reports its risk and controls assurance, although at the time of the inspection these were not embedded. 

Advance gains assurance through a programme of internal audits, reviews and periodic external reviews. However, the inspection identified areas where assurance arrangements, particularly in relation to asset management and repairs, require further strengthening. Advance was able to evidence it had taken steps to strengthen its assurance arrangements and enhance oversight.

During the inspection we saw evidence that Advance has sufficient oversight of its financial plans and has undertaken a range of sensitivity and scenario testing that indicates it is able to deal with a reasonable range of adverse variances. There is also a suitable suite of triggers and mitigations in place to manage downside risk.

Advance meets our expectations on value for money. The board receives regular financial and value for money reporting and demonstrates an understanding of cost drivers and emerging pressures.

Viability – V2 – June 2026

Based on the evidence gained from the inspection, we have assurance that Advance’s financial plans are consistent with, and support, its financial strategy.

Advance has an adequately funded business plan, sufficient security in place, and is forecast to continue to meet its financial covenants under a reasonable range of adverse scenarios.

However, Advance has the ongoing challenge of delivering its relatively low margin support services and housing activities in an uncertain economic environment and needs to manage the risks associated with the delivery of significant ongoing investment in existing homes to improve the quality and energy efficiency of those homes.

In the context of wider economic uncertainties, these factors limit Advance’s capacity to respond to adverse events. We have assurance that Advance has reporting and oversight in place to manage delivery within its stated risk appetite, and its stress testing shows that there is financial capacity in the business plan to mitigate a reasonable range of adverse scenarios.

Background to the judgement

About the landlord

Advance owns and manages around 2,362 social homes across the Midlands, London, South East and South West of England. 

Advance provides housing, support and other community related services, specialising in supporting people with learning difficulties and mental health conditions. 

Based on its unaudited accounts for 2025/26 Advance’s turnover for the year ended 31 March 2026 was £57m. Advance employs 661 full-time equivalent staff, including support staff. Advance’s development programme over the next six years aims to deliver 486 homes comprising of rented and shared ownership homes.  

Our role and regulatory approach

We regulate for a viable, efficient, and well governed social housing sector able to deliver quality homes and services for current and future tenants.  

We regulate at the landlord level to drive improvement in how landlords operate. By landlord we mean a registered provider of social housing. These can either be local authorities, or private registered providers (other organisations registered with us such as non-profit housing associations, co-operatives, or profit-making organisations). 

We set standards which state outcomes that landlords must deliver. The outcomes of our standards include both the required outcomes and specific expectations we set. Where we find there are significant failures in landlords which we consider to be material to the landlord’s delivery of those outcomes, we hold them to account. Ultimately this provides protection for tenants’ homes and services and achieves better outcomes for current and future tenants. It also contributes to a sustainable sector which can attract strong investment. 

We have a different role for regulating local authorities than for other landlords. This is because we have a narrower role for local authorities and the Governance and Financial Viability Standard, and Value for Money Standard do not apply. Further detail on which standards apply to different landlords can be found on our standards page. 

We assess the performance of landlords through inspections and by reviewing data that landlords are required to submit to us. In Depth Assessments (IDAs) were one of our previous assessment processes, which are now replaced by our inspections programme from 1 April 2024. We also respond where there is an issue or a potential issue that may be material to a landlord’s delivery of the outcomes of our standards. We publish regulatory judgements that describe our view of landlords’ performance with our standards. We also publish grades for landlords with more than 1,000 social housing homes. 

The Housing Ombudsman deals with individual complaints. When individual complaints are referred to us, we investigate if we consider that the issue may be material to a landlord’s delivery of the outcomes of our standards.  

For more information about our approach to regulation, please see Regulating the Standards.

Further information

• Regulating the standards

• Regulatory standards for landlords

Related documents